This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug optimization/12215] [3.3 regression] ICE in make_label_edge with -fnon-call-exceptions -fno-gcse -O2
- From: "mark at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 5 Oct 2003 18:27:39 -0000
- Subject: [Bug optimization/12215] [3.3 regression] ICE in make_label_edge with -fnon-call-exceptions -fno-gcse -O2
- References: <20030908201220.12215.nick@ilm.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12215
------- Additional Comments From mark at codesourcery dot com 2003-10-05 18:27 -------
Subject: Re: [3.3 regression] ICE in
make_label_edge with -fnon-call-exceptions -fno-gcse -O2
On Fri, 2003-10-03 at 23:17, ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org wrote:
> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12215
Let's call the possibly-trapping insn I. Let's call the next nonnote
insn after I N.
This patch changes the compiler to emit the new instruction (X) right
before N, rather than right after I. Now, N and I are in different
basic blocks. So, X will be executed any time control enters the block
containing N, even if not falling through from I. Won't that be wrong?
Thanks,